Genophilosophy Essay

Gregory Stock, in his article Choosing Our Genes, asserts that at this point not ethics are important, but rather the future of genetic technology. Stock supports his conclusion by providing powerful examples of how genetic modifications can benefit our population anywhere from correcting genes at the time of conception to extending lifespan. He wants to inform his audience about all of the benefits of genetic technology in order to prove that there are way more advantages in this technology that are highly desirable by people of different ages. He reaches his readers by writing a very detailed yet coherent article that brings awareness to various groups of people from parents to be to older populations.

Contrary to Kitcher’s minimalist model that constrains eugenic decisions only to avoid neurological diseases, Gregory Stock’s position in the debate defends maximalist eugenics in which individuals have total free eugenic decision-making, including enhancement, without any state coercion. He wants readers to accept and adopt such a position by arguing that genetic engineering such as selecting and alternating embryos is an inevitable future and human destiny (7, Stock, CC p.279). For example, if redesigning humans became commonplace, Stock reasons that parents would give their children endowments they desire but could not otherwise obtain and thus further expand life’s possibilities to the next generation (8, Stock, CC p.276). In this society, people’s genes would become an embodiment of their parents’ values and preferences. People would arguably want such endowments since they would view modifications as beneficial in

In the essay, titled "Building Baby from the Genes Up?" Ronald M. Green proclaims his approval of genetic selection and extraction of human genes. He gives reasons that support his outlook on the matter, that this will be useful to civilization. Ronald M. Green is in violation of several ethical codes, with his view on genetic modification. I am against genetically modified humans, and I will explain to you, why this is my stance on the subject. First, I will summarize exactly what Ronald M. Green says in his article about his view on genetic modification and why practicing it is vital. Second, I will describe research

Analyze the benefits and limitations of genetic and reproductive sciences for individuals, families, and society.

The entire point behind this idea is to lessen the amount of children that are born with genetic disorders. However, this research has garnered many critics, and they have some valid points about why it is not a good idea. The critics are saying that this line should not be crossed because the amount of women that could be positively affected by this is small. Also, the director of the Center for Genetics and Society, Marcy Darnovsky, stated that “mission creep” could become very real if this happened.

Human society always attempts to better itself through the use of technology. Thus far, as a species, we have already achieved much: mastery of electronics, flight, and space travel. However, the field in which the most progress is currently being made is Biology, specifically Genetic Engineering. In Aldous Huxley’s Brave New World, humanity has taken control of reproduction and biology in the same way that we have mastered chemistry and physics. Efficiency drives the entire goal of society, leading to the creation of an assembly-line process.

Francis Galton’s ideas on heredity were based on the theories of heredity and evolution within The Origin of Species, written by his cousin, Charles Darwin. Galton sought to apply Darwin’s concept of selective breeding to man in an effort to improve upon British society. When speaking to the Sociological Society at London University in 1904, Galton defined eugenics as: “ the science which deals with all influences that improve the inborn qualities of a race; also with those that develop them to the utmost advantage”(1904). Galton’s initial attempts to apply the concept of eugenics to the improvement of humanity proved futile, up until 1900. According to the historian, Allen E Garland, “ With the rediscovery of Mendel’s law of heredity in 1900, however, the study of heredity in general and eugenics in particular found fertile ground, particularly in the United States (225). Eugenics would fast become a prevalent movement the world over, but nowhere more so than in the United States and

The film condemns the false premises of genetic engineering and eugenics that aim to eradicate all ‘undesirable’ traits and imperfections. In this ‘manicured’ world, human passions still seek liberation; people quietly sabotage the rules, loyalty and love continue and individuality survives. The human sprit it suggest remains strong, and can act as a counterbalance to the negative tendencies of an oppressive, controlling society where uncontrolled technology is dangerous, but also

In society, newly introduced ideas and morals are viewed upon with mixed feelings, including the process of genetic modification, which has yet to prosper or to crumple. The topic of genetic modification is introduced and detailed upon within the articles “Expert Groups Says Embryo Genetic Modification Should Be Allowed” by Will Dunham and “UK Scientists Seek Permission to Genetically Modify Human Embryos” by Ian Sample. They delve upon the idea that the process of genetic modification can be appropriately used in which to prevent certain unnecessary and unwanted diseases from developing, ultimately saving lives, and can provide further insight for human development. Additionally, they discuss the point that genetic modification is still at

The birth of a child is supposed to be a time of joy, the uncertainty of life leads to this one point in time. Will she or he be the next president, a star athlete, a genius or just fall into the crowd as another citizen. With recent advancements in science, this uncertainty has become a thing of the past. The human being is now seen as a commodity and no more is valued in the uncertainty of individuality. The parent can now choose how they want their child to come out or develop into. Sandel’s book The Case Against Perfection: Ethics in the Case of Modern Eugenics is a well researched look into examples of modern eugenics and the problems that arise from it. These topics range from the ethics of cloning, athletes using performance enhancing drugs, and other practical uses in everyday life. Sandel’s argument is that there is value in human nature (even with all its flaws), and genetic engineering will forever change human nature. Destroying the very essence of what it is to be human and scarring humanity. The main features of human nature that will be altered: are responsibility, humility and solidarity.

Genetic engineering has become increasingly normalized in today’s society, and people are exposed to this technology now more than ever before. Most people are aware that food companies practice genetic engineering on their plants in order to design the most profitable crops, but it isn’t generally known that this same technology can be applied to humans. The concept of picking certain traits and characteristics of a human may appear desirable, but many risks and potential side effects may follow considering that it is unknown what genetic engineering could affect in future generations. Francis Fukuyama, an accomplished and distinguished professor of political economy and philosopher, conveys his concern that genetic engineering is developing at a surprisingly rapid rate. Within his book, Our Posthuman Future: Consequences of the Biotechnology Revolution, he claims that genetic engineering not only will potentially be detrimental for the human race, but due to the change in nature of human beings, such engineering will also result in significantly impacting government and politics. Although genetic engineering can be seen as a huge technological advancement that could potentially help millions, there are drastic negative effects and reasons for disapproving genetic engineering that are too important to be overlooked.

Biology is the science of life. Technology uses science to solve problems. Our society has progressed in its understanding of life to the point that we are able to manipulate it on a fundamental level through technology. This has led to profound ethical dilemmas. The movie Gattaca explores some important bioethical issues that are currently the focus of much dispute. The underlying thematic issue presented is the question of the extent to which biologically inherent human potential determines the true potential of a person. Perhaps the most controversial issue in Gattaca is the use of genetic engineering technology in humans to create a more perfect society; this is, essentially, a new

However, it is to say that this view is seen from that of a human’s perspective. If humans are seen as a “mere normal organism of the planet Earth,” the process of genetic engineering

Inheritance typically revolves around the transmission of information from parents to offspring by genes, alleles, and therefore the information that is stored in the DNA sequence. However, this is not always, or only, the case. Traits can be acquired from parental figures and generations by mechanisms that do not involve genes or alleles; these are referred to as non-genetic mechanisms. A few examples of factors that cause heritable changes through non-genetic mechanisms are hunger, stress, parenting, gut bacteria, and language. In these things, hesitance does not go through conventional genetic mechanisms. Instead, they can go through something called epigenetic mechanisms, which are inherited but not through genes themselves, rather due

On the most surface level, human genetic engineering and human genetic modification are a new and rapidly developing field of science that deals with directly altering the DNA (genetic makeup) of a living human cell. From early science fiction to the present day, taking control of humans’ gen es and directing the flow of evolution has been a subject of debate for many people. Human genetic engineering or HGE tends to bring up thoughts of dystopian futures where altering DNA has unexpectedly resulted in horrible mutant humans that can’t survive and thus the human race perishes, but this is not necessarily the outcome. Since genetic engineering is an emerging field of science, there are still many moral and ethical issues that need to be addressed before continuing research. Atheists and theists both have valid reasons to support / resist the continuation of this field of science. For the purpose of this paper, it will be assumed the reader has a reasonable understanding of the terms atheism, theism, DNA, genes, genome, and how a persons DNA (their genotype) essentially dictates the physical appearance and abilities that person portrays (their phenotype).